[sdiy] Analysis of the TB-303 CPU timing

Julian Schmidt elfenjunge at gmx.net
Thu Mar 16 18:45:36 CET 2017


hmmmm, my first try says it's probably not worth the hassle.
Or can you hear a difference?

http://soundcloud.com/a-boy-and-his-sid/land-of-confusion-on-different-303-cpus

CPUs used in random order:
QS, RE-CPU, TB, RE-CPU with extra sloppy timing (double the latency 
double clock polling time (3.6ms)
All normalized to -1dB

julian

Am 16.03.2017 um 13:32 schrieb Tom Wiltshire:
>
> On 16 Mar 2017, at 11:43, Julian Schmidt <elfenjunge at gmx.net 
> <mailto:elfenjunge at gmx.net>> wrote:
>
>> So I could record a few patterns with different CPUs in the same 
>> synth hardware to exclude influences by differences in the analogue 
>> part of the machine or different knob settings.
>>
>> Would be interesting to find out
>> A) If people can hear the difference between original sequencer, 
>> emulated sequencer and a tight sequencer
>> B) What listeners prefer if they are able to distinguish it.
>>
>> maybe even add a 4th audio example to the test where the jitter and 
>> latencies are increased slightly?
>
> I think this would be very interesting. There's a lot of hand-waving 
> and magic around this little silver box and not much in the way of 
> hard facts, so some serious research like you've been doing is 
> extremely welcome.
>
> If you be bothered, setting up the test as a blind study so people 
> don't know which file they're listening to, and then asking which one 
> they think they heard and how much they like it would definitely be 
> the best way to proceed, but I realise the work involved.
>
> Thanks very much for what you've done so far. It's fascinating.
>
> Tom

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20170316/b062fccb/attachment.htm>


More information about the Synth-diy mailing list